O.P. Garg, J. - (1.) The petitioner, B.P. Yagyik, has filed this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order of his removal from service.
(2.) The wood cut profile of the case is the petitioner, B.P. Yagyik was initially appointed as a clerk in the State Bank of India on January 27, 1962. In course of time he came to be promoted in officer Grade-I in the year 1978 . Following detection of several irregularities committed by him while functioning as Officer/Branch Manager at Ram Nagar (Varansi) Branch and also as Officer JMGS -- I at Johnstonganj (Allahabad) Branch, he was placed under suspension w.e.f. March 11, 1983. A chargesheet dated May 19, 1983 was issued to him which contained as many as 11 charges. In substance, the charges related to irregular demand draft purchase of cheques, local printing of stationery far in excess of discretionary powers despite Controlling Authority's specific advices to the contrary, disbursal of loans without proper documentation, irregular release of collateral security and negligently passing for payment a forged, cheque. After conclusion of enquiry it was found that out of eleven charges, three charges were proved while five were partly proved. Three of the charges were not established against the petitioner. The Chief General Manager, Lucknow local head-quarters, who was the disciplinary authority, concurred with the finding of the Enquiry Officer and on March 29, 1986 imposed the extreme penalty of dismissal of the petitioner from service. Against the decision of the disciplinary authority imposing the penalty of dismissal. Shri Yaghik preferred an appeal on May 20, 1986 before the appellate authority who after considering the matter modified the penalty of dismissal to removal from service vide order dated October 5, 1987. Sri Yagyhik submitted a review petition to the Reviewing Committee. The said petition was rejected on March 29, 1990. Thus the order of removal from service became final.
(3.) The petitioner challenged the order of removal from service by filing a writ petition No. 21442 of 1990. The said writ petition was allowed in part on July 13, 1995. The order dated October 5, 1987 passed by the appellate authority was quashed and the matter was remanded back to the appellate authority for decision afresh keeping in view the observations made in the body of the judgment, it was further directed that if the petitioner applies for personal hearing the appellate authority shall afford him an opportunity of hearing. The view taken in the aforesaid writ petition was that mere substitution of the word 'dismissal' to the word 'removal' speaks of non-application of mind to the controversy involved in the matter and that the appellate authority did not come to the independent conclusion in view of the decisions reported in Bhagat Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1983-II-LLJ-1)(SC) and Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India (1988-I-LLJ-256)(SC).;